Talk:Virtual Telecommunications Access Method

Computing: Networking / Software Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Networking task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software.

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by a member of the Guild of Copy Editors.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

Virtual

I would say it was "virtual" in the sense that it abstracted the underlying hardware layer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.190.82.16 (talk) 12:05, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Any access method abstracts away the underlying hardware. Virtual is in the name simply because IBM was releasing it for OS/VS rather than OS/360. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 14:12, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:50, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Virtual telecommunications access method → Virtual Telecommunications Access Method — Official name is upper case. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 14:12, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

ACF/VTAM not the first

Prior to ACF/VTAM, IBM had chargable compilers, utilities and OS extensions, e.g., VM/SE. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 19:27, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Desired timeframe of references

I can add references to the article, but I need to know whether to add the oldest documents I have access to or the most recent. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 20:11, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If the cite is supporting a timeline or historical event then use the earliest document after the event. If the subject of the cite isn't time sensitive use the latest documents to provide currency of information. Thanks for helping.
SBaker43 (talk) 05:43, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Communications"

Recently a copyeditor, User:Milesandkilometrestogo, changed all occurrences of "communications" to "communication." This sounds just plain wrong to my ear, although apparently he has a reasonable amount of computer background. I'd suggest changing it back. Anyone else want to chime in? Peter Flass (talk) 19:29, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and thank you for reviewing my copy-edit. I had changed the world 'communications' to 'communication' in some places as it seemed more appropriate to me. However if I am wrong, I will gladly welcome anyone to rectify my mistakes. With regards, Milesandkilometrestogo (talk) 09:08, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's why I posted here. Rather than just go by my opinion I'd like to hear from others. Thanks for your good work.Peter Flass (talk) 10:35, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that communication (singular) sounds wrong, and I would perefer using communications. However, IBM is not consistent; while the name VTAM uses the plural, the name ACF uses the singular. So as long as the product names are correctly given and other uses are consistent, it's a matter of taste. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 16:59, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Renamed links in bitsavers

@Dujo: A number of documents archived in bitsavers.org, e.g., http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/ibm/sna/acf/GC30-3033-1_Introduction_to_Advanced_Communications_Function_May79.pdf, have been moved or renamed. Wiki references to the old URLs show up as dead lings even though the documents are still in bitsavers. Is it better to point these to the new URL, e.g., http://bitsavers.org/pdf/ibm/sna/acf/GC30-3033-1_Introduction_to_Advanced_Communications_Function_197905.pdf, or to archive.org? -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 07:22, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I asked myself the exact same question. One solution could be to use the url parameter for the new bitsaver URL and the archive-url parameter for the archived version of the old URL. -- Dujo (talk) 22:22, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]